Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Michael Moore supports Wesley Clark?

by Michael Moore
Michael Moore supported Ralph Nader during the 2000 presidential election. Apparently he has some support of Gen. Wesley Clark, as the least offensive candidate - he doesn't disqualify him for his bad points like leading the army during the bombing of Serbia.
A Citizen's Appeal to a General in a Time of War (at Home)

September 12, 2003

Dear General Wesley Clark,

I've been meaning to write to you for some time. Two days after the Oscars,
when I felt very alone and somewhat frightened by the level of hatred toward me
for daring to suggest that we were being led into war for "fictitious reasons,"
one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television.

And that person was you.

Aaron Brown had just finished interviewing me by satellite on CNN, and I had
made a crack about me being "the only non-general allowed on CNN all week." He
ended the interview and then turned to you, as you were sitting at the desk
with him. He asked you what you thought of this crazy guy, Michael Moore. And,
although we were still in Week One of the war, you boldly said that my dissent
was necessary and welcome, and you pointed out that I was against Bush and his
"policies," not the kids in the service. I sat in Flint with the earpiece still
in my ear and I was floored -- a GENERAL standing up for me and, in effect, for
all the millions who were opposed to the war but had been bullied into silence.

Since that night, I have spent a lot of time checking you out. And what I've
learned about you corresponds to my experience with you back in March. You seem
to be a man of integrity. You seem not afraid to speak the truth. I liked your
answer when you were asked your position on gun control: "If you are the type
of person who likes assault weapons, there is a place for you -- the United
States Army. We have them."

In addition to being first in your class at West Point, a four star general
from Arkansas, and the former Supreme Commander of NATO -- enough right there
that should give pause to any peace-loving person -- I have discovered that...

1. You oppose the Patriot Act and would fight the expansion of its powers.

2. You are firmly pro-choice.

3. You filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the
University of Michigan's affirmative action case.

4. You would get rid of the Bush tax "cut" and make the rich pay their fair

5. You respect the views of our allies and want to work with them and with the
rest of the international community.

6. And you oppose war. You have said that war should always be the "last
resort" and that it is military men such as yourself who are the most for peace
because it is YOU and your soldiers who have to do the dying. You find
something unsettling about a commander-in-chief who dons a flight suit and
pretends to be Top Gun, a stunt that dishonored those who have died in that
flight suit in the service of their country.

General Clark, last night I finally got to meet you in person. I would like to
share with others what I said to you privately: You may be the person who can
defeat George W. Bush in next year's election.

This is not an endorsement. For me, it's too early for that. I have liked
Howard Dean (in spite of his flawed positions in support of some capital
punishment, his grade "A" rating from the NRA, and his opposition to cutting
the Pentagon budget). And Dennis Kucinich is so committed to all the right
stuff. We need candidates in this race who will say the things that need to be
said, to push the pathetically lame Democratic Party into have a backbone -- or
get out of the way and let us have a REAL second party on the ballot.

But right now, for the sake and survival of our very country, we need someone
who is going to get The Job done, period. And that job, no matter whom I speak
to across America -- be they leftie Green or conservative Democrat, and even
many disgusted Republicans -- EVERYONE is of one mind as to what that job is:

Bush Must Go.

This is war, General, and it's Bush & Co.'s war on us. It's their war on the
middle class, the poor, the environment, their war on women and their war
against anyone around the world who doesn't accept total American domination.
Yes, it's a war -- and we, the people, need a general to beat back those who
have abused our Constitution and our basic sense of decency.
The General vs. the Texas Air National Guard deserter! I want to see that
debate, and I know who the winner is going to be.

The other night, when you were on Bill Maher's show, he began by reading to you
a quote from Howard Dean where he (Dean) tried to run away from the word
"liberal." Maher said to you, so, General, do you want to run away from that
word? Without missing a beat, you said "No!" and you reminded everyone that
America was founded as a "liberal democracy." The audience went wild with

That is what we have needed for a long time on our side -- guts. I am sure
there are things you and I don't see eye to eye on, but now is the time for all
good people from the far left to the middle of the road to bury the damn
hatchet and get together behind someone who is not only good on the issues but
can beat George W. Bush. And where I come from in the Midwest, General, I know
you are the kind of candidate that the average American will vote for.

Michael Moore likes a general? I never thought I'd write these words. But
desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to know more about you. I
want your voice heard. I would like to see you in these debates. Then let the
chips fall where they may -- and we'll all have a better idea of what to do. If
you sit it out, then I think we all know what we are left with.

I am asking everyone I know to send an email to you now to encourage you to
run, even if they aren't sure they would vote for you. (Wesley Clark's email
address is: mailto:info [at] None of us truly know how we
will vote five months from now or a year from now. But we do know that this
race needs a jolt -- and Bush needs to know that there is one person he won't
be able to Dukakisize.

Take the plunge, General Clark. At the very least, the nation needs to hear
what you know about what was really behind this invasion of Iraq and your fresh
ideas of how we can live in a more peaceful world. Yes, your country needs you
Michael Moore likes a general? I never thought I'd write these words. But
desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to know more about you. I
want your voice heard. I would like to see you in these debates. Then let the
chips fall where they may -- and we'll all have a better idea of what to do. If
you sit it out, then I think we all know what we are left with.

I am asking everyone I know to send an email to you now to encourage you to
run, even if they aren't sure they would vote for you. (Wesley Clark's email
address is: mailto:info [at] None of us truly know how we
will vote five months from now or a year from now. But we do know that this
race needs a jolt -- and Bush needs to know that there is one person he won't
be able to Dukakisize.

Take the plunge, General Clark. At the very least, the nation needs to hear
what you know about what was really behind this invasion of Iraq and your fresh
ideas of how we can live in a more peaceful world. Yes, your country needs you to perform one more act of brave service -- to help defeat an enemy from
within, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, an address that used to belong to "we, the


Michael Moore
Lottery # 275, U.S. military draft, 1972
Conscientious Objector applicant
mailto:mmflint [at]
by Fred
In the last weeks, Moore got scared that Bush was gonna win and he abandoned Nader, tried to get Nader not to run in 'swing' states. Nader disagreed. He said that the Democrats were never going to move left if they Greens backed off at the last minute. So Moore went off to the 'safe' places, and Nader went to Florida, where history was made.

Moore is great in a lot of ways, but he's from middle america, and, in an effort to connect with the guys watching NASCAR and sitting at the bar, he's making a blunder, plays *right* into the military-industrial-corporate-capitalism game.

They know the sheeple are desperate, and the fradulent polls constructed by the sold-out corporate power mongers show that sheeple won't go with anyone who isn't essentially a military fanatic. So this is what we get.

What we need is the hard facts on Clark to spread around. And of course, a few choice words from the Counterpunch writers - the rare left publication which still has some spine, apparently.
by schau
There's a lot of that going around. Bush is a war criminal. Lieberman and a lot of the other democrats are wanna-be ones. Is there any democrat who has acceptable international policy ideas?
by NLG reposter
Dear Michael Moore,

I'm a great fan of yours - books and films - and really enjoyed your talk when you were in San Diego.

I appreciate your complimentary comments about Wesley Clark, but remember he prosecuted the US-led NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, an illegal and immoral attack on the people there. His forces used cluster bombs and depleted uranium, and killed 500-1500 civilians. Clark outlined NATO's strategy to disrupt, degrade, devastate, and destroy the infrastructure of Yugoslavia. At one point, he slammed his fist on the table, and exclaimed, "I've got to get the maximum violence out of this campaign - NOW!" One month into the bombing campaign, he admnitted it "was not designed as a means of blocking Serb ethnic cleansing." (See my chapter, "The Myth of Humanitarian in Kosovo," in LESSONS OF KOSOVO (Broadview Press, 2003).

This was not a just war (see my op-eds on the law professors' website, Jurist: "Pacification for a Pipeline: Explaining the U.S. Military Presence in the Balkans,", and "No 'Victor's Justice' in Yugoslavia: NATO Must Be Held Accountable for its War Crimes,"

I know Clark opposed "Operation Iraqi Freedom," but he's had his sights on beating Bush for a long time, and he knew the Iraq campaign was doomed from a military standpoint.

I would be very hesitant to endorse Wesley Clark, given his history in in Yugoslavia.

With respect,

Marjorie Cohn
Professor of Law
Thomas Jefferson School of Law
San Diego

Executive Vice-President
National Lawyers Guild
by Richard Oxman (mail [at]
Dear Michael Moore: Desperate times require desperate measures? No. They require the best possible measures. War criminal Clark has no more of a place in the hearts ot those trying to replace Bush than does the likes of Dean who supports the death penalty and the Pentagon budget. In fact, by most standards, I'd say he deserves much less of a place. Certainly, you have done a huge disservice to The Movement trying to make a place for him. These times require standing very clear and firm for what needs to be done. It will do no good to replace Bush, if he is replaced by the likes of someone who will justify things like the bombing of Sudan and/or the invasion of Somalia. That's just dragging out the agony of the world in a less blatant, less arrogant way.
by Sam Wise
First, let me say THANK YOU to Michael Moore for standing up for Wesley Clark. I know he's not perfect from a leftist standpoint, but we must realize that he is a very probable candidate and maybe has the best chance out of all the Democrats of beating Bush, given his resume.

All of us lefties must face a hard set of facts; this country currently has a two-party system, and will for the forseeble future. I must say that I am an avid supporter of the Green Party, and would love to see them in power, with the Democrats representing the conservative side of American politics...

But that day is far, far away, if it is even coming at all.

We must realize that the vast majority of American voters are not going to accept the Green Party's entire platform (or any fully leftist platform for that matter) and that, although it is unfortunate, we are stuck with only two choices: Republican or Democrat.

Sure, the Democratic party has many, many flaws and needs a lot of work. But it will take people like us to rebuild the backbone of the Dems, and if we abandon them entirely without first trying to work with them, the end result may be catastrophic for the leftist movement.

Sure, it would be totally awesome if we could build a movement strong enough to push the Dems out and the Greens in, but lets be honest with ourselves; that movement is nearly impossible given the stalwart ignorance of most of America. It would be awesome if it could succeed, but the chances of that are undeniably slim...and for right now, the cost of failure is FAR too great: Imagine an America with the Republicans in complete control, while the Dems and Greens fight a war underground...very uncool.

Our only choice, especially in 2004, is Democratic. We MUST push Bush out of office, and we MUST realize that the only choice we have for a replacement will be a Democrat. Sure, whoever it is probably won't be perfect in our eyes, but I can guarantee that any one of those Dems will be better than Bush (with the possible exception of Lieberman).

Thanks again Michael for standing up for Clark, for he may well be the man who can knock that imbecile out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Just because he's a military man doesn't make him a bad guy...

...and if Clark is guilty of war crimes for Serbia, Bush should have been on trial LONG ago for Afghanistan and Iraq...
by lesser evil IS evil
Clark IS guilty of war crimes for Serbia, AND Bush should have been on trial longago for Afghanistan and Iraq. At Nuremburg both men would hand hung.

Choosing between Bush and Clark is choosing between Hitler and Himmler.
by pointer
by Thomas B. Newman
I 'm an early Dean supporter, because he was the only one I thought had a chance who was appropriately critical of the Iraq war. But I'm glad Wesley Clark is in the race. Too soon for an endorsement, but let's wait and see.
by Brian Hanley
Why I would consider voting for Clark, even though I consider the Kosovo war a terrible mistake.

Basically, for me, it comes down to the need for a middle of the road, fiscal conservative, (sort of like Clinton was, but with good character, the respect of and respect for the military) who also understands foreign policy and war well enough to not turn our Afghanistan and Iraq ventures into the ultimate horror they could become.

Kosovo? Clark had a job and he did it as well as he could. That's what a general does.

Let's not kid ourselves. I spend a lot of time in the Caucasus, because I run an office there, and the whole region is a damned tinderbox. Fact is, the Al Qaeda/Taliban/ultra-orthodox types know from experience the more wrecked a country is, the easier they can control it. They are crude, but their leaders aren't dumb. Their leaders are also fanatical, dedicated, and rather effective long term thinkers. They know the warlord game inside and out. We don't. Our people don't understand nations run by what are essentially organized crime families and syndicates.

Consider the effect of a sappy though perhaps temporarily popular simple withdrawal from the middle east. Recruitment for fundies would skyrocket much as occurred after Somalia, the Kremlin would go back to it's machinations (it's foolish to think we are the only ones reaching for the brass ring of oil revenue) and in a matter of months the developed world could be brought to its knees by a very simple strategy.

That strategy is this: Destroy the oil field infrastructure from Iraq through the entire Peninsula. Whack it down to a small fraction of what it is, and fight like hell to make it impossible to bring it back online. Don't think those fundies couldn't do it. They like the dark ages. It's their world, and it's the situation in which they dominate. We are so automatically conditioned to our way of thinking, we just don't comprehend people who can think in terms of wrecking themselves in order to bring their enemy low. If it could be coupled with a fundamentalist takeover of Pakistan, we'd by up a serious creek.

That is a highly plausible scenario we face now. Bluntly, I don't think Howard Dean, much as I like some of his domestic agenda, is up to what is in front of us now.

If anyone is up to it, then it's Wesley Clark, out of everyone visible. Second choice for me would be Bush, simply because experience has tempered him and taken the stupid edge off his overconfidence in the middle east. But we can't just cut and run. Not now. This isn't Vietnam.

We are absolutely swimming in hubris on all sides. The right is positively drowning in it, the liberal middle is completely ensconced in a castle of "can't really touch me" hubris. Clark is a military man, and he is one of the only voices that really has consistently enunciated our hubris from the get-go. I trust him to do the strategically sane and necessary thing, not just the politically expedient fashion of the week which could land us in hell. I also think it's going to take some real leadership and brains to chart a course out of where we have gotten ourselves.

I think Clark has a sane grasp of economics. He knows that deficits and giveaways to the most wealthy are not what we need now. That will get our economy back on an even keel.

That's why I think Clark can win. I think a lot of Americans sense all this, though many can't enunciate it beyond a sense of uneasiness. People "get it", that Bush is a doctrinaire elitist who hasn't got the slightest clue about basic finance. Ordinary people are afraid for their jobs, and for the future of our economy, with very good reason. But, like me, a lot of people are extremely wary of knee-jerk attack liberalism over Iraq and simplistic non-solutions, just as we are wary of knee-jerk attack "conservativism" over domestic issues.

by a "mistake"!?!
It was a crime. At Nuremburg, Clark would have hung, and Clinton with him.
by Concerned
Quick question. If the "war crimes" by NATO killed 1000 civilians, how many were killed during the ethnic cleansing? How many more would have died if no one ever got involved. This is how the left self-destructs... I remember seeing T-shirts about how it was criminal that we were not getting involved in Yugoslavia. You cannot have it both ways, either the powers that be get involved in their typical bumbling way, or they don't and the local murders carry the day.

As far as Weslay Clark goes, the left either has to embrace someone somewhat mainstream and electable, or endure 4 more years of George Bush. Those are the only options ladies and gentlemen.
by history buff
The first victims of ethnic cleansing in the Yugoslav civil war were Serbs, The greatest number of victims of ethnic cleansing in the Yugoslav civil war were Serbs. When the fascist, racist Croat militia ethnically cleansed the Krajina, of Serbs whose families had lived there for centuries, NATO flew their air support. There was no ethnic cleansing of Kosovars by Serbs. It's a NATO lie. The Kosovars we saw on TV fleeing Kosovo/a were fleeing NATO bombardment, not Serbs. A third of them fled into Serbia. Why would they do that if they were afraid of Serb persecution?

by Luke Bradley (webworldL [at]
Folks, here are the facts:

An organization called the PNAC is basically sitting in the whitehouse with an agenda for "American Global leadership" (control).
A preplanned war for control of the middle east magically had an excuse materialize just when it was needed in 9/11.
Our constitutional liberties are dissapearing.

Now Historians have shown there are three "M's" a party must control before total fascism. They are:
The Money
The Military
The Media

Bush now controls the first, the second, and about 90% of the the third through the first. (Folks like Michael Moore being the exception to Fox News) Traditionally liberals have clung more to the media, but now we are losing it.

The point is that What Moore is doing is damage control and fascism prevention. If Democrats become representive of the military, this is a good, good, thing. That will leave repulicans with the money (due to there insane tax cuts) and the media will still be up for grabs. It doesn't matter how bad the dems are, it matters that power is distributed between multiple groups...All totalitarianism is a monopoly of state...Pepsi and Coke may both suck, but so long as they compete than pressure can be put on them and we can reward there good or bad actions by switching our choice....
by A Johnson
Fellow Progressives,

Lest we not forget, George W Bush is a common criminal. Our fight to remove George W Bush is the fight to remove the criminal class from the White House and to clean house of all those who have aided and abetted his criminal enterprises - be it no-compete multi-billion contracts for Bechtel and Halliburton to sweet-heart deals for Poopy Bush's Carlyle Group to tax breaks for the Rich, Lazy & Crooked.

We join hands with all our honest and law abiding fellow Americans in demanding Mr. Bush's impeachment and prosecution. This is not a liberal or a conservative issue. It is a moral issue and goes to the root of what it is to live in our American Democracy.

It appears that Wesley Clark is an honest man. His prosecution of the war in Yugoslavia may have been excessive, but he was not alone in planning and prosecuting this war. Was there a better way in prosecuting that war? I honestly don't know. I wasn't there and I don't know to what extent Milosevic had on the populations in question. What I do know as a student of history is that Milosevic had single-handedly alienated an entire nation of Yugoslavs that Marshall Tito had held to together as a federation for 40 years. In my opinion Milosevic was/is as big a scumbag as George W Bush.

Having said that, we must demand of all Democratic Candidates a return to a rule of law and the most stringent prosecution of George W Bush and his criminal cronies for the raping and pillaging of America. Howard Dean and all the other DLC-wannabe candidates have shied away from demanding the criminal indictment of Kenneth Lay (Enron) and Bernard Ebbers (MCI Worldcom) . These bastards are the reason that the Gropenator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is governor-elect of California. These bastards are the reason that we have record low interest rates in America and a sluggish economy . These bastards are the reason that jobs are escaping America in record numbers. The lack of FBI investigation of these bastards show the morally bankruptcy of our most senior law enforcement in this country. The bastards are the poster children of what is wrong with America and it is the absolute responsibility of all Democrats to demand that these bastards be brought to justice. Dennis Kucinich has demanded their prosecution. All the other candidates must demand the same.

by Joey Z
I don't get it, why doesn't anyone take a look at Kucinich, he's as electable as anyone of the dem. candidates and he's got integrity and lots of political experience. I think people should open their eyes and see whats in front of them!
by more militarism is not the solution
Full expose on republican war criminal Wesley Clark. See comments at:
by Republican Party Shill
Thanks to people like Michael Moore, the country continues to lurch to the right. We're getting a Republican in the White House no matter which candidate wins. We've controlled the debate with nonissues such as "electability." Democrats like Moore are so afraid of Bush, they'll elect their own warmonger in an effort to look tough. We Republicans are laughing all the way to election day...
by cp
actually, they just had Michael Moore on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman, and he gave acceptable answers regarding Wesley Clark, I guess.

Moore said that he isn't and has never been a democrat. Someone called in about support for school of the Americas, and he said Clark said he would shut it down if there was evidence of recent offenses from recent graduates were made evident, and Clark said that the set of SOA protesters should also go to Harvard Business School and call for it to be shut down because they actually are responsible for a greater cumulative level of crimes. And Moore said he would probably go try to do something at Harvard Business School.

Moore also said it's great if Clark is coming out with these liberal positions that might differ from his past positions because we need lots of people to convert from centrist or conservative viewpoints. plus maybe clark could win in Ohio and Pennsylvania, Nevada and Florida and it's easier to work on reforming clark than bush.

Regarding Mumia, he said it was semi-tongue in cheek and you have to read the chapter of his book in context and he probably brought his joke too far.
by sam donlon (samdonlon [at]
What is Micael Moore doing? Can't he see that Wesley Clark's just another power-hungry slave to corporate interests. Per, Clark has the distinction of being the only registered lobbyist who is running for President. His firm is Acxiom Corp., which is the company that will provide the "solutions" for the new background checks that will be performed on all airline passengers by this summer. I guaranty he wouldn't do a thing to diminish the Patriot Act.
by Erik Octavian
Put simply, yes there is - Dennis Kucinich.
by pointer
Friday, Nov. 4, 2005 2:59 p.m. EST Rush Limbaugh: Schweizer Book 'Just Fabulous'

Top conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh lauded the bestselling new book "Do As I Say, Not as I Do" by Peter Schweizer on Friday, recommending it to his audience as a must read.

"It's just fabulous," the radio icon told a caller. "It is just replete with example after example of the utter hypocrisy of the left," he added, before detailing some of the stunning revelations in Schweizer's book.

"Michael Moore, for example, owns stock in Haliburton. Al Franken over the course of his career has hired 112 people - only one of them black," Limbaugh noted.

"The book points out how Barbra Streisand, while lamenting how labor unions are treated in this country, gets all her movies produced in Canada."

"It talks about Ted Kennedy and his family, how they opposed doing away with the estate tax - that the Kennedy family had sheltered all their money to avoid paying estate tax." he added.

"This book will surprise you - and it won't," Limbaugh said. "Because we don't believe that liberals are these pure and clean as the wind-driven snow anyway. And this book will just give you reams of data to illustrate just what a bunch of hypocrites they are."

"It's fun reading and it is eye-opening," Limbaugh told his audience, before praising "Do As I Say" as "something well-worth investigating."
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!


$78.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.


Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network